Sunday, 25 January 2015

Setting the miners free to
dewater as much as they like and without any prior impact assessment is not consistent with the Bill’s treatment of
miners’ authority to divert surface water in streams, which currently also
requires a water licence. Under the amended section 98 of the Water Act they
may only divert a stream if the particular diversion and its impacts were
assessed as part of the grant of an environmental authority and a condition of
the authority allows it.

Comment

It should be permissible that objections against an environmental
authority or its conditions (including any Coordinator General’s conditions)
may include objections against a proposed stream diversion.

First Refusal for Affected
Landholders

Under the Bill’s clause 334Z of
the MR Act, the miner may use the associated water for any purpose anywhere. This
could result, for example, in groundwater which the bore owner is entitled to
and is relying upon, being taken and used by the miner off lease for a
non-mining purpose, or sold to someone else for a non-mining purpose.

Comment

Where the dewatering produces associated water in excess of a miner’s requirements
for the mining purposes, the miner should be required to treat the surplus by
reverse osmosis, then give all potentially affected landholders first right of
refusal to take the treated water for their own use, at no cost.

Agreement

A template
make good agreement (which is readily adapted for either mining or CSG) is available from landholder Services. It was first adopted
at the Callide Mine some 6 years ago and has been subjected to extensive review
since. Provisions for baseline testing, monitoring and setting of trigger
levels in the original agreement have operated satisfactorily.